Report Date


Case Against

A Medical Centre in the area of Cardiff & Vale University Health Board



Case Reference Number



Upheld in whole or in part

Ms D complained about the decision of a GP Practice in the area of Cardiff and Vale University Health Board to remove her name from its patient list. She said that the Practice had not taken that decision properly because it made it before discussing its concerns with her, prior to giving her a warning and without taking into account all the relevant facts.

The Ombudsman found that the Practice did not take its decision to remove Ms D’s name from its patient list properly. She made that finding, in relation to the decision-making process, for four reasons. Firstly, she was of the view that the Practice did not have full knowledge of the facts. Secondly, she was not satisfied that it considered giving Ms D a warning in accordance with relevant guidance. Thirdly, she was of the view that it did not complete a significant event analysis (a way of formally analysing an incident for learning purposes), as required by its “Violent and Aggressive Patient Policy” (“the Policy”). Finally, she noted that it was unable, despite relevant legislation and guidance, to provide any documentary or video evidence of the meeting in which it made this decision. She considered that those failings had caused Ms D a significant injustice in the form of uncertainty and distress. She upheld Ms D’s complaint.

The Ombudsman recommended that the Practice should apologise to Ms D for mistakes related to its decision to remove her name from its patient list and for its failure to demonstrate that it took that decision properly. She asked it to inform the NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership (this body carries out GP registration duties on behalf of the Health Board) that it had not given Ms D a warning, as stated when it asked the Partnership to remove Ms D’s name from its patient list.

She recommended that it should also ask the Partnership to update its records accordingly. She asked it to revise the Policy in light of the failings identified. The Practice indicated that it would implement these recommendations.